Although he failed to take the welterweight championship from Nate Marquardt in his final Strikeforce fight, Woodley made an impressive move to the UFC. He knocked out Jay Hieron in his promotional debut, but then slipped up, losing a split decision to Jake Shields in his sophomore effort.

Woodley bounced back strong, however, knocking out Josh Koscheck, and then scoring a TKO stoppage of Carlos Condit recently at UFC 171, making him one of the top contenders in the 170-pound division.

His fight with MacDonald (16-2) could end up being for the top spot on the contender’s list.

The Canadian has also amassed a stellar career in the Octagon. Having spent years as former champion Georges St-Pierre’s understudy, MacDonald has run his UFC record to 7-2, including victories over the likes of Nate Diaz, Jake Ellenberger, BJ Penn, and most recently, Demian Maia.

The fight with Woodley presents MacDonald with the opportunity to fully step out of St-Pierre’s shadow and potentially earn a shot at the title.

UFC officials have yet to name a headliner for UFC 174, which takes place on June 14 at Rogers Arena in Vancouver.

I don’t know, for the contract money per fight maybe? You have no idea of what happens in the real fight world.

Liam O’Keefe

this way the UFC won’t have to pay him more when he wins more. UFC will have everyone sign contracts to budget the money and just cut you when they want. It’s all bs.

shakejunt

more fights on a contract means that your pay scale has a bigger chance to go up. win more, get paid more. short contracts mean that you need to renegotiate and risk being offered less than you feel you’re worth.

Me

I’m not sure what you mean by the above. From what I’ve seen Liam O’Keefe has it right and such contracts are simply a way for Zuffa to lock down rising fighters indefinitely. I’ve never seen or heard of Zuffa renegotiating with or offering a fighter more show/win money in the middle of a contract regardless of their win streak. The only reason I could see from a fighter’s perspective to sign such a long deal would be job security and that’s non-existent in the UFC since they reserve the right within said contracts to fire any fighter at any time for any reason.

It seems that from a rising fighter’s POV something more along the lines of a 3 or 4 fight deal would be ideal. If he wins those fights his stock rises and he can sit at the table with Zuffa and negotiate for more money. If he loses those fights, or the majority of them, well, then he’s fighting for his job regardless of the number of fights left on his deal.

shakejunt

your salary wouldn’t go up, but your backstage bonuses would and they would have to give you higher profile fights meaning more coverage and sponsorships. idk, probably also a nice signing bonus. shows that the company values you.

Me

That doesn’t seem accurate. For the most part backstage bonuses are a myth and those that exist are designed to keep fighters in their place by making them rely on under the table “gifts” that are completely unregulated and therefore dispensed solely at the whim of the individual holding the purse strings (in this case Zuffa). Historically (labor relations in general) they’re used to dismantle or stymie labor’s negotiating power and ability to organize and foster a “grateful” and subservient relationship between employer and employee – it’s a classic tactic.

As far as more coverage and sponsorship money goes those are the natural results of winning regardless of the length of a contract. And signing bonuses only occur when a contact is being negotiated unless you’re referring to specific fight contracts (fighter x signing to fight fighter y). If that’s the case than winning is also the only means of increasing said value and the number of fights on a fighter’s overall contract have no bearing.

I get that it’s a natural (and correct) assumption that Zuffa wanting to lock a fighter down for extended contracts means said fighter is on the upswing and earning more money but I still don’t see how that (contract length) is anything more than a byproduct of a fighter’s success (winning) and not a contributing factor. If anything 8 fight contracts with only the promoter being able to terminate said contract at any time and for any reason can only favor the promoter.

shakejunt

ok but perhaps it’s like this

option A: sign for 2 fights, make x/x per fight

option B: sign for 8 fights, make x+y/x+y per fight

of course it’ll favor the promoter, that’s where the money is, but that doesn’t mean that the fighters are being had at all times. this is a sport that still runs on a ppv model and thus can’t pay like a team sport. your performance directly influences your pay, it’s not like football where you can sign a huge contract, get hurt, and still get paid while not playing.

Jon Doe

the same as the NFL, just do your job and you are guaranteed to get contract binding pay. Start to fall off then you are no longer doing your job, hence you get cut. same principle
guys like Wand, Diego, Tito, Leben, etc (he chose to retire) they all have crap records, their job is to entertain and bring in money nothing more

Shartnado2, the Sloppy One

no its not like the NFL, they get guaranteed money up front.

Jon Doe

Not literally exact, obviously.. wtf…? They also get multi- million dollar contracts, incentives, bonus, sponsors, i can go on and on. Does UFC fighters get cut before their contract? Does NFL players get cut before their contract? Its just a comparison in principles. Internet and Trolls geez…??

Shartnado2, the Sloppy One

Yes literally, NFL players get money up front guaranteed even before they step foot in a locker room . No what youre talking about before you talk about it dummy

Jon Doe

“No what youre talking about before you talk about it dummy”

lol………!!!!!!!!!! (know)
“upfront money” “upfront money” upfront money”
lol… sticking with that angle to your grave. “upfront money” its not the same” wah…” lol…. Yes or No
Do NFL/UFC athletes get cut before their contract if/when they underperform? bet you dont answer..

The natural

It’s not like that at all wen u perform at ur top level and u loose a close fight then ur saying he don’t deserve top dollar wen ur fighting 2-3 top five guys in the world u just happen to b not as good on two outta five u go right back to making nothing

The bat

Wen Jo flacco has a bad night and throw 4 interceptions and loose the game his pay doesn’t go down till the end of the year

Jon Doe

again… its a comparison of principles. whether the team is looking for an excuse, underperformance, value etc. Promotions well find a way to release an athlete. D Jackson just got cut and the excuse was gang affiliation. Did he underperform? No. Fitch, Shields, Okami, did one of the following,
1. Was Overpaid
2. Does not entertain
3. Loss of physical ability
4. Was getting in the way
5. Behavior
Wand, Diego and Tito are perfect examples. Terrible records but still got paid, why? They sell tickets and they entertain, thats their job.
Whatever the case maybe, I find it perplexing how the internet expect a full encyclopedia explanation. Its not literal but a comparison of similarities between the two sports. Now if we want to get literal than Basketball/Baseball would be a valid counter argument as they get paid regardless of value/entertainment/skill/performance etc.

Shartnado2, the Sloppy One

These guys are better off with short term contracts, do good and your worth more but youre stuck in a regimented contracted with no negotiation to move up in salary. Do bad and your just gone.

The natural

Yes this deal is only good if he wins the belt that’s y it’s so inticin to sign but u don’t win belt and loose title fight u go back to 6 grand a fight end up in Nate Diaz shoes they should say if ur fighting a too ten guy u get paid if not u don’t